K. Venkateshwarlu vs State Of A.P on 17 August, 2012
Counsel for the respondents has distinguished the judgment
relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner as reported in K.
Venkateshwarlu (Supra) stating that in that case also, even after acquittal, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court had been pleased to observe that the inquiry could be
conducted against the delinquent employee; judgement rendered by the
Constitution Bench in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. Union of India and another
5.
AIR 1964 SC 787 has also been referred therein. It is pointed that the order of the
Trial Court dated 21.03.2014 does not show that any final form against the
petitioner has been accepted. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that at
this stage, neither is the proceeding without jurisdiction, nor it is actuated by
malafides, calling for any interference when no final decision has been taken in
the matter. The Disciplinary Authority should be left to take an objective decision
on consideration of relevant materials produced during inquiry including the
written statement and reply to second show-cause of the petitioner.